This is misleading, he’s talking about code review tools not vibecoding…
Nowhere in the title or the article is vibe coding mentioned.
That’s the point.
Being slightly more useful isn’t the only problem AI needs to solve. What about morality issue? Sure, slavery is very useful, but some of you, including me, ban Nestlé products. Why do you not have the same standard with products that are produced by, or assisted in production with AI?
I’m not trying to defend him, but it seems like he was moreso saying linux will never be a reactionary tool of principle. It seems more like an admittance that the AI is here to stay and theres little point in trying to pivot everything to reverse an unstoppable trend?
I’m not trying to defend him
Defend him from what?
Defend him against the many that disagree or otherwise anti-support his comments in this article. Apologies if you were just being rhetorical
hey freeBSD how you doin’
BSD gaming when?
Because AI used to suck and it no longer sucks as hard.
Oh it does, especially in the wrong hands
The point is that in the correct hands it does not.
Then how do you stop its wrong-hand usage ?
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
Insisting on high standards for code readability and quality - even higher than before GenAI was a thing - could help.
Ofc, but even before LLMs, executives wanted to get things fast in any way possible, allowing for crappy code to get shipped. LLMs made it far easier and likable since “AI SMART”
Thankfully, Linux doesn’t have executives and shareholders like Windows does… right?
If they fork, they leave the main branch AI free, doing their own thing. This way the main branch does not go down the toilet with AI. This is good.
I think you may be misunderstanding the situation. He’s telling AI critics to stop complaining or fork. If that happens, the main branch will still have AI submissions, and the fork will be the AI-free one.
Important to note: Torvalds is not an LLM evangelist, nor does he just accept AI slop uncritically. The official policy is that LLM written/assisted code is fine, but the quality must hit the bar expected of Linux kernel submissions, and the submitter takes full responsibility for the code correctness whether they personally wrote it or not. Just submitting LLM code with no verification or tests is a great way of getting banned from submitting pull requests and getting a very angry email from Linus.
And also he’s not advocating for everyone to start using it, rather saying that as the primary kernel maintainer, he’s finding it useful to help do a first pass triage on the flood of PRs.
He did not say that. He said that he only uses git and email as primary tools to work on Linux.
He said he does use LLMs for personal projects to test out ideas.
What he said in this case is that people who contribute to Linux can use AI if they wish as long as their code is good and that nobody should attack them for using AI.
And soon we’ll learn he has an AI girlfriend/chatbot. These big ego types are low hanging fruit for the lying, ego inflation machines.
You mean he has some “Claudia” like Richard Dawkins?
